GhostWriter16
Deity
OK, let me know when you feel like you might be up to it and we can work some rules out.
@Mobboss- The only problem is the mods will not keep people that aren't part of the debate thread "Out" if its the Tavern.
-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
One on One Thread Debate Topics, Participants, "House Rules", and more
- Thread starter downtown
- Start date
OK, let me know when you feel like you might be up to it and we can work some rules out.
@Mobboss- The only problem is the mods will not keep people that aren't part of the debate thread "Out" if its the Tavern.
Yes, they will. The debate chair reports the offending posters, the mods deal with them as they would any other reported poster. Problem solved.
The vast majority of reported posters from the Tavern are 'dealt with' with no action being taken. I wouldn't count on mods excising posts from debate threads if those threads are in the Tavern. If you want assistance from mods, it should be in the Chamber. If you think there won't be a need, then the Tavern would be fine.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
I don't see why you have to be a baby about this...
GhostWriter16
Deity
To be fair, it might not be him, he may be passing down info from higher up.
I understand what he's saying, the tavern is for less moderation, so to have "Less" and "More" than the old OT in the same thread is a bit weird. I disagree though. I think we should be able to have the type of debate with (Within tavern rules) low blows and mild flaming and still be allowed to keep intruders out. Then again, I imagine mods just don't want to look at the Tavern much. I can understand that desire.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Where is the fun in that?
Easily solved. The two that are actually debating simply vow to only to reply to each other during the debate until the debate is closed. Nothing says those debating have to recognize non-participants. In fact, I would say if a non-participant is quoted or material they post is used by a debater that would incur automatic disqualification of the offender.
Uh, why not?
_random_
Jewel Runner
I've seen mod action happen in the tavern (and at least once from Crazy Cami). Throwing your own opinion into threads designated for one-on-one debate would seem to constitute "being a jerk."
You'd think.
It's almost as if the mods actively want the Tavern to turn into a cesspool of scum and villainy so it can be used as an excuse to ignore OT going forward.
I think it's good that people are taking the initiative with this in the Tavern, because it means less work for mods. I think it would probably work, too, because I doubt anyone would interrupt a thread that is clearly marked as only being for two debate participants and a chair. More self-regulation is a good thing. But I'm unsure why you'd expect to have your cake and eat it too. Mods are not going to be babysitting debate threads in the Tavern, or reports from debate threads coming from the Tavern, anymore than they currently babysit any thread or report from the Tavern (with reports, the title indicates it comes from the Tavern, but can't indicate that it's coming from a specific type of thread; I and other OT mods don't prioritise looking at Tavern reports (which doesn't mean we never look at them, and it might be that OT mods with nothing better to do would pick up a stray post here or there), so are simply less likely to look at them speedily in the first place, before even considering the relative non-involvement we maintain in the Tavern). Wouldn't it strike you as a little petulant to demand moderator attention when the option is available to you by having the debate in the Chamber anyway? The decision from staff was that we will facilitate these sorts of threads in the Chamber, that being the place where moderators ostensibly actively moderate (though that this is ostensible rather than necessarily actual indicates stretched resources, and demands concomitant prioritisation; staff has decided to make debate facilitation in the Chamber a top priority by committing to excise unwanted posts). But it would be unreasonable to expect staff to prioritise moderation outside the ambit of the Tavern rules inside the Tavern, when we are providing the opportunity for moderator attention in the Chamber anyway.
I imagine most people would throw their opinions into one-on-one debate threads not because they are being a jerk, but because they are unaware of the rules set by the OP or that it is a debate thread. Since when have OT mods enforced rules set by the OP in the Tavern?
RobAnybody
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,945
I hereby suggest that paragraphs be mandatory in such debates.
If that's the case, then your opinion actually makes sense.
If there was a separate subforum for debates, that would be no problem, even if we moderated at the Tavern standard (so to speak), because those reports would be identifiable as coming from a debate thread. But reports are simply entitled 'Off Topic - The Tavern: Reported Post by <name of reporter>'. If close moderator attention to these reports or threads is demanded, that requires much closer moderator attention to the Tavern as a whole. And the staff decision was not to have a separate subforum (and certainly wasn't to give the Tavern as a whole closer attention).
And again, "don't expect" and "I wouldn't count on it" don't mean that mods will flatly refuse to deal with any out of place posts that they think constitute jerkish behaviour, it just means that attention is far less likely to be given (to the extent that it shouldn't be expected, counted on or eagerly anticipated), and when it is, it needs to be consistent with the lack of attention we give to everything else in the Tavern. I certainly wouldn't want to induce reliance by saying that we'll deal with something we may or may not get around to ever dealing with.
And again, "don't expect" and "I wouldn't count on it" don't mean that mods will flatly refuse to deal with any out of place posts that they think constitute jerkish behaviour, it just means that attention is far less likely to be given (to the extent that it shouldn't be expected, counted on or eagerly anticipated), and when it is, it needs to be consistent with the lack of attention we give to everything else in the Tavern. I certainly wouldn't want to induce reliance by saying that we'll deal with something we may or may not get around to ever dealing with.
GhostWriter16
Deity
I'd like to see a separate subforum, where anything from tavern standards to Red Diamond standards could be used based on whatever rules the initial OP sets out. That said, you are probably right that if its clearly marked as a "One on One debate thread" and the rules clearly layed out, none but the truest jerks would deliberately interfere with the process. I have no issue with trying this out. Both ignore AND report any such jerks and hope it works out.
RobAnybody
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,945
A separate subforum, you say? I propose a rule that anyone involved with one these debates be unable to post in any other forum while any such a debate is active. Also, that we name the subforum the FormaMobby subforum.
All in favor, say "aye".
All in favor, say "aye".
Change we can believe in.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Nay.
This shouldn't interfere with our ability to post in other places as we see fit. If it does, I won't do it.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Soooo....you want to bring the old OT back.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Not exactly, although I admittedly never supported the split in the first place, I supported the "Anti-red diamond" concept that JR proposed that would more or less create a thread that was governed more or less like the "Tavern" is now.
That said, this forum I'm proposing would ONLY be for one on one debate, and would be unique for that reason. It would also be clearer to all than any thread what the rules are. Only people who can post in the forum (Except threads discussing the debate) are the chair and the two contestants.
The mods already rejected this though, so we have to make do with what we've got. The consensus seems to be to "Deal with the Tavern" rather than "Go into the cursed chamber." I disagree but I'm willing to concede it. So I'll wait for anyone to challenge me
Similar threads
